Obama's Mideast Legacy Is One of Tragic Failure

The Middle East is a more dangerous place after eight years of the Obama presidency than it was before. The eight disastrous Obama years follow eight disastrous George W. Bush years, during which that part of the world became more dangerous as well. So have many other international hot spots.

In sum, the past 16 years have seen major foreign policy blunders all over the world, and most especially in the area between Libya and Iran — that includes Israel, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Turkey and the Gulf.

With regard to the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, the Obama policies have made the prospects for a compromise peace more difficult to achieve. When Israel felt that America had its back — under both Presidents Clinton and George W. Bush — they offered generous proposals to end settlements and occupation in nearly all of the West Bank.

Tragically the Palestinian leadership — first under Yasser Arafat and then under Mahmoud Abbas — did not accept either offers from Israel Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Clinton in 2000-2001, nor Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's offer in 2008. Now they are ignoring current Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's open offer to negotiate with no preconditions.

In his brilliant book chronicling American-Israeli relationship, Doomed To Succeed, Dennis Ross proves conclusively that whenever the Israeli government has confidence in America's backing, it has been more willing to make generous compromise offers than when it has reason to doubt American support.

Obama did not understand this crucial reality. Instead of having Israel's back, he repeatedly stabbed Israel in the back, beginning with his one-sided Cairo speech near the beginning of his tenure, continuing with his failure to enforce the red line on chemical weapons use by Syria, then allowing a sunset provision to be included in the Iran deal, and culminating in his refusal to veto the one-sided UN Security Council resolution, which placed the lion's share of blame on the Israelis for the current stalemate.

Obama's one-sided Cairo speech, on June 4, 2009, took place before a large number of Islamic sheikhs and members of the Muslim Brotherhood. (Image source: White House)

These ill-advised actions — especially the Security Council resolution — have disincentivized the Palestinian leadership from accepting Netanyahu's offer to sit down and negotiation a compromise peace. They have been falsely led to believe that they can achieve statehood through the United Nations, or by other means that do not require compromise.

The Iran deal, while it delayed Iran's acquisition of nuclear weapons, virtually guaranteed that it would be allowed to develop a nuclear arsenal as soon as the major restrictions on the deal expire in the next decade. Israel will never allow a regime sworn to the destruction of the nation-state of the Jewish people to secure such a weapon.

So the likelihood of an eventual dangerous military confrontation has been increased, rather than decreased, by the poorly negotiated Iran deal.

Obama's failure to carry out his red-line threat against the Syrian regime's use of chemical weapons has weakened American credibility among its allies and adversaries alike. It has created a power vacuum that Russia was quick to fill. Turkey, too, has flexed its bullying muscles, as its irascible and egomaniacal leader has used the excuse of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) to go after another American ally, the Kurds, who have at least as strong a claim to statehood as the Palestinians.

America's traditional allies in the Middle East — Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Jordan — have all been weakened by Obama's policies, most especially the Iran deal. America's traditional enemies — Iran, Syria and Hezbollah — have been strengthened, along with Turkey.

Terrorism has increased and moved northward to Europe, partly as a result of the Syrian crisis. ISIS, al Qaeda, the Taliban and other terrorist offshoots, though weakened, remain a serious threat to regional stability and to civilians.

A destabilized Middle East poses increasing dangers to American allies and to peace. The blame for this instability is shared by Presidents George W. Bush and Obama. The invasion of Iraq and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein divided that country, rendering it ungovernable, and invited Iran to play a major role in its current destabilized condition.

The toppling of Moammar Gadhafi left Libya open to increasing terrorist influences. The attempt to replace Bashar Assad has turned Syria into a nightmare.

The forced resignation of Hosni Mubarak initially placed Egypt under the control of the Muslim Brotherhood, and strengthened Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Only a coup, opposed by the Obama administration, restored some semblance of stability to Egypt.

Lebanon has become a wholly-owned subsidiary of Hezbollah, a terrorist group under the influence of Iran that has 100,000 missiles aimed at Israel's population centers. The "Shiite arc" now runs from Iran through parts of Iraq and Syria and into Lebanon.

This is the tragic legacy of the Obama administration's failed efforts to undo the harms caused by the George W. Bush administration. Radical Islamic terrorists have replaced authoritarian secular tyrants.

Both are bad, but tyrants at least produce a degree of stability and predictability. They also tend to keep their tyranny domestic, whereas terrorists tend to export their evil tactics.

We should have learned the lesson from the replacement of the tyrannical Shah of Iran by the far more tyrannical and dangerous ayatollahs. But we did not. We insisted on supporting the "democracy" of the Arab spring, which resulted in the replacement of undemocratic domestic tyrants by undemocratic international terrorists.

History will look kindly on Obama's domestic successes, but it will judge his mideast policy harshly.

Alan M. Dershowitz is professor emeritus at the Harvard Law School and author of "Taking the Stand: My Life in the Law" and "Electile Dysfunction: A Guide for Unaroused Voters."

Comment on this item

Name:

Email Address:

Comments:

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Gatestone Institute greatly appreciates your comments. The editors reserve the right, however, not to publish comments containing: incitement to violence, profanity, or any broad-brush slurring of any race, ethnic group or religion. Gatestone also reserves the right to edit comments for length, clarity and grammar. All thoughtful suggestions and analyses will be gratefully considered. Commenters' email addresses will not be displayed publicly. Gatestone regrets that, because of the increasingly great volume of traffic, we are not able to publish them all.

12 Reader Comments

stevenl • Jan 15, 2017 at 21:35

It depends from which side of the instrument one is looking! It also depends on who is looking!People can only agree to disagree! Obama, as far as he is concerned, is the ONLY judge!!!

Reply->

HOWARD JOFFE • Jan 15, 2017 at 17:12

It is sad statement of fact that the UNITED NATIONS is not the forum for which it was created. It has become a jaded and biased organization. Sadly it has passed its use-by date. The majority of its decisions are anti-Israel. The UN is today the forum for those who oppose the only democracy in the Middle East.

Reply->

B. E. Borneman • Jan 15, 2017 at 14:34

Would someone please take the time to explain to me, & the rest of us on this side of the Atlantic, why there is so much anti-Jewish sentiment 'over there.' What have 'they' done to deserve this? The list of their achievements in the fields of science, medicine, etc, is a very long one. And, I have seen no evidence where they have been a threat to any country's security. Jews have contributed much to the advancement of humankind.When I compare the Jewish culture to that of the Arab Muslims , the latter are still stuck in the dark ages of the 7th century. What positive contributions have they made (for the betterment of humankind)?
Given a choice who would you want as a neighbour (& why?)

Reply->

David Goldenberg • Jan 15, 2017 at 12:58

Professor Dershowitz: I suggest you check the rhetoric on Obama's domestic 'successes' against the economic data. Most of Obama's self-declared evidence for his domestic successes (based on failed liberal policies) are based on cherry-picked data. As in his utterly failed foreign policies, which you have delineated, his domestic policies will prove to be equally unsuccessful.
In sum, Mr. Obama deserves far less credit than he thinks he deserves.

Reply->

Isaac Barr • Jan 15, 2017 at 12:43

Typical for a Jewish Democrat Dershowitz who refuses to understand that Obama did not fail. Rather he was very successful in his plan outlined in 2009 Cairo speech. Islam is flourishing globally, Iran became a nuclear power with hegemony over the ME and beyond as US gave 150 billion dollars, 116 tons of Uranium to Iran. He encouraged the carnage in Syria to create a Muslim Hijra to Europe with Islamization of Europe and down played Islamic terror in US while releasing the most dangerous Muslim Jihadists from Guantanamo. He succeeded to put a wedge into the American Jewish community creating the Iranian, Soros financed J Street subsidized by the White House too. In 2009 in Cairo the writing was on the wall and Dershowitz knew or should have known that, the web was stretched, and the American Jews still do not feel that with UNSC 2334 the rope is tightening, as planned by Obama, around the neck of Dershowitz and his Jewish Democrats. This is the real tragedy.

Reply->

Jack Isaac Barr • Jan 16, 2017 at 15:09

After 8 years of Obama, Liberal Democrat Dershowitz finally decided to taste the horrible stew that was cooked, it is toxic and it stinks. Dershowitz should be nicknamed the whirling Dervish because he seems to be spinning around himself watching in a dizzy spell what Obama, Kerry and Hillary have wreaked and wrote belatedly a half-baked opinion about Obama's perceived successes which are at best questionable and at worst abject failures.

Reply->

Michael Waugh • Jan 15, 2017 at 12:02

I have no reason to speak up for Israel but I respect them as the only democracy in the region. They are able to defend themselves against all those around them, the Palestinians in particular. The Jews have a long history in the region. They are the only civilised race in the region. The Palestinians are a waste of space and for some reason seems to have the support of Europe.

Reply->

vivienne • Jan 15, 2017 at 11:41

The Shah should have had Khomeini executed and the US should have kept her nose out of Iranian affairs. Shah was intolerant of radical Islam and yes many were dealt with severely. Frankly today in Europe we should follow the Shah and Assad's example. Assad is not fanatical his wife is British and he studied in the UK as a Doctor his first choice until his father insisted he take over. There are no decent leaders outside of Syria and Egypt in the Middle east. Israel cannot be included among these dangerous Islamic nations. Thank god Obama is going.

Reply->

David Polovin • Jan 15, 2017 at 09:43

"History will look kindly on Obama's domestic successes, but it will judge his mideast policy harshly."Sadly wrong on both counts. Domestic successes are few, least of all holding, let alone advancing the position of the Dems. No Presidency, Senate, Congress or the majority of State Governorships. His Mideast policy on the other hand will be remembered by his Cairo Speech and his betrayal of Israel, to the applause of the Muslim block and their Western sycophants. His legacy is to be remembered, not necessarily admired, by those who hate America too.

Reply->

Dr David Salinger • Jan 15, 2017 at 08:44

All this from a man who voted for Obama TWICE !

Reply->

Michael Wasserman Dr David Salinger • Jan 16, 2017 at 01:59

It was clear in 2008 that the influences on Obama were not supportive of Israel. Even his early actions as president revealed his true colors on this issue. Yet, Alan Dershowitz fell in line and not only voted for Obama in 2008, he fell for it again in 2012. In supporting Obama, Dershowitz influenced other Jews to believe that Obama was not anti-Israel let alone anti-Semitic. While I agree with how Dershowitz feels at present about Obama and his treatment of Israel, one must consider Dershowitz himself in part responsible for Obama achieving his position in government to have such a deleterious effect on our Jewish state.

Reply->

Solomon Balas • Jan 15, 2017 at 08:05

Wrong Professor; Obama executed plan perfectly; I once read on the internet since deleted, Obama bet Edward Saeed and Mansour Khalid (Khalid got Obama a scholarship to Harvard from Waleed ibn Talal ) That Obama is the only man alive who knows how to destroy Israel; please examine these facts: Morsi for Mubarak $8bn to El Shater Morsi to let Salafis use Northern Sinai for a front{per El Shater's son}, Refused supply of hellfire missiles to Israel in conflict with Hamas, Tried to shut TLV airport , Forcing ceasefires to suit Hamas, Selling $13bn Patriots to Qatar, Iran deal, Walking away from Syria, creating and developing ISIS, arming Jabhat al Nusra ,,, Paying Iran $2bn from 2010 BEFORE there was a deal.. Obama is a Traitor